R v Qaumi (No 36)

In the case of R v Qaumi (No 36), the accused was on trial for serious criminal charges. During the trial, a motion was made to discharge a particular juror due to concerns about the juror's potential bias. The juror had a prior acquaintance with an important witness in the case, who was a key figure in the prosecution's case against the accused. The nature of the connection between the juror and the witness, as well as the circumstances of their prior acquaintance, were central to the motion for discharge.

The legal issues before the court included whether the juror's prior acquaintance with the witness created a reasonable apprehension of bias, and if so, whether this bias could be addressed through directions to the jury. The court had to consider whether the acquaintance was such that it might influence the juror's decision-making process, even if the juror denied any current influence. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the directions provided to the jury could mitigate any potential subconscious bias the juror might have.

The court found that the connection between the juror and the witness, despite the six-year gap since their last interaction, was significant enough to raise a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court acknowledged the juror's denial of any current influence but emphasised that bias could operate subconsciously. The court also noted that the fact the juror would have been excused earlier in the trial did not negate the need to address the issue at hand. The court concluded that the potential for subconscious bias could not be adequately mitigated by directions, and therefore, the juror should be discharged. The court then proceeded to consider whether the trial could continue with the remaining jurors, applying the appropriate statutory test to determine this.

The court ultimately decided that the trial could continue with the remaining jurors, provided the appropriate directions were given to address any concerns about bias. The final orders included the discharge of the juror in question and the continuation of the trial under the conditions specified.